View TEI
The Dorr Letters ProjectElisha R. Potter Junior to John Brown Francis: |
Introduction
In this letter, Elisha Potter, Jr., ever the student of political history, reminds John Brown Francis that the doctrines of the Rhode Island Suffrage Association resemble ideology that was used during the debate over Michigan’s admission to the Union. Potter rejoices at the fact that the Whigs, the conservative party in his view, were in control of the U.S. Congress. Potter wanted concessions to be made as quickly as possible. He actually indicated that he thought the People’s Constitution could succeed.
Letter
April 17, 42
Dear Sir
When Michigan was admitted into the
union, the assent of the state to some conditions imposed
by Congress was given by an irregular convention called
in the same way the Peoples Convention was, we had
then a majority in the U.S. Senate. In the debate the same
questions were brought up as are now agitated with
us. Calhoun, Morris, Preston, Bayard & in the House Mr.
Jenifer opposed the admission.
Strange, Dana, Buchanan, Benton, Brown, Niles, Fulton,
King (of Geo) in the Senate & in the House Mr. Vanderpoel
of N.Y. & Toucey of Cont advocated the admission on exactly
the same principles as those of the Peoples party.
This was in the Session of 1836-7 & you will find all the
speeches in the Appendix to the Congressional Globe of
that year. The discussion brought in the Harrisburg
Riots, the revolutionary attempt in Maryland and the
precedents in the cases of the admission of Tennessee &
Kentucky.
This may give us some idea of what course
the debate would likely take if our case could again
come before Congress.
It is perhaps fortunate that the Whigs at
present are the majority in Congress as the Southern
members & Whigs will from interest & feeling be
conservative.
Parmenter had a meeting at Brands Ironworks
last night. He abused Whipple in good sound terms &
spoke very well of us too. So much for Whipple’s
overlooking Dr. Brown. He quoted some Updike-like
remarks which we had made to or in presence of
Dr. Brown.
Willard Hasard & a considerable number
of our suffrage folks here are for holding back & not
having any meeting. But I have no doubt but that
a few will hold back on get together & choose Reps.
A Whig Caucus (called a no party
caucus here have nominated Updike & JP
Hasard for Reps.
In Hopkinton at the regular election
Thurston & Spicer (Dem) will run against Barber and
Holdredge.
The only chance I see of the PC
falling through now is in the officers elected refusing
to serve.
How fortunate that at Washington we
took some pains to prune down Whipples statement
of facts. As he had drawn it it would have
been very obnoxious, As it is now no one can
object to it.
I am afraid that our friends in Providence
are holding their heads too high. We all know that
the doctrines of the Peoples party are popular & catching and
I have thought for some time it would be for the advantage
of the whole US for us to stop it in the beginnings by
some concession.
If they succeed here their example
will be followed in a number of states. How much
better for us then to stop it in the best way we
can.
Parmenter says when they get their government
organized they intend to communicate the information
to Congress. This of course will bring the matter
before them.
did not run a separate prox.
Questions
What do you think Potter means here: “If they succeed here their example will be followed in a number of states. How much better for us then to stop it in the best way we can”?